Winners of the 2014 Sony World Photography Awards, part 2

2014 Sony World Photography Awards

The World Photography Organization has announced the winners of its 14 Professional categories. American photographer Sara Naomi Lewkowicz was named as 2014's L'Iris d'Or/Sony World Photography Awards Photographer of the Year. Selected from 140,000 entries from 166 countries, Lewkowicz's story is a a stark and intimate look at domestic violence.

Winning images will be on exhibition at Somerset House in London from May 1-18 as part of the 2014 Sony World Photography Awards Exhibition.

See a selection of the winning images from the Professional categories in our gallery. To see all images for each winner visit the main Sony World Photography Awards site. To see the winners in the Open, Youth and National categories see our previous post.

Comments

140,000 entries and this was the result? Did the judges actually look at these images or simply follow the vogue for mediocre, bland, "point and shoot" style imagery! They are desperately uninspiring and a real disappointment for the thousands of photographers on this site.

After reading some posts, I understand at last what's worth on this pic. Nothing, it's the series, that's been awarded. Because the first image of the serie looks like a happy family and is far too ordinary... :)

Whenever DPR posts a story about photos winning awards it is always the same handful out here that wrap their arms around the results and lecture others on how to define art. Art is very subjective. Award winning? Milli Vanilli won a Grammy as best new artist in part for their singing.

If the "award" in this story was titled "best Photo by a Soccer Mom" would the photos be heralded in the same way? I am not so sure.

It is nice that Sony gives out awards but in the end it really doesn't mean much.

By the way, in addition to being recognized by Sony, Sara Lewkowicz's work has been published Time Magazine, Stern, L’Espresso, Das Magazin (Switzerland), Opzij (The Netherlands), Claudia (Brazil), Days Japan, Internatzionale, Politiken (Denmark), the Baltimore Sun, and numerous other magazines and newspapers. She has won several grants and awards, including the 2013 Alexia Student Grant, first place in contemporary issues in World Press Photo and the 2013 Ville de Perpignan Remi Ochlik Award, and she has been named the 2013 College Photographer of the Year by CPOY.

MAYBE you ought to at least pay a little attention to the "handful" of people here...or at least give an explanation as to why you don't think Sara deserves to be honored by Sony. I guess that's my problem - lots of people saying "crap" but few people giving a reasonable argument as to why it's crap.

I'd have a lot more respect for Sara Lewkowicz if she had hit the husband over the head with her camera rather than just shooting snapshots of the wife getting beaten up. Neither her actions nor her photographic skills merit any award, imo. Just one more photo-voyeur (or voyeuse in her case).

"Whenever DPR posts a story about photos winning awards it is always the same handful out here that wrap their arms around the results and lecture others on how to define art."

mcshan, the inverse is true as evidenced in multiple posts (negative) including "art is _____". I provided no comprehensive definition of art. If art ilicits a response in the viewer, that condition may be due to any number of factors. As a teacher, or simply a viewer of art, I cannot dictate the perameters of one's experience - nor would I want to. What I can do is express my perception(s) and educate about historical or current context(s); speak to form and ideas and address precedent and the like. I take no issue with negative views. However when an expression includes emphatic dismissive terms e.g. "crap", "garbage", "worthless", then that commenter has departed from subjective evaluation and seems to be declaring an objective condition. Worse, this often lacks a conscientious explanation of their judgment.

Jeff seltzer: she probably got this award for her CV, not for her photos. There is a tendency for institutions to bestow awards upon people who have been heavily awarded in the past. It's unconscious/conscious bias.

Too many DPReview people with their noses glued to their screens, staring at pixels, or fretting about what the other brand is doing, or worrying if their new camera might have "shutter shock" or some other trivial defect. When confronted with actual photography, they know not what to do and respond with fear and derision!

If I had to pick the "best" of 140,000 photos, I confess I might have to start by dumping 99.9% to reduce the heap to the 25 to 50 that my poor mind might be able to assess with care. So, yes, I would probably throw out all the pictures of pets, wild animals, muscle autos, cycles, air shows, seacoasts, weapons, flowers, sports, sunsets, touchdowns, and whatnot that the DOWG* crowd savors, but whose culinary equivalent would be a Big Mac with fries.

Art, like religion, pierces complacency and makes us humble.

But let's also be honest that most photography is staged, selective, and impossible to separate from bias and the whim of taste. No different than music, food, or camera brands.

I don't disagree - of course, it's subjective. But, it's still surprising how quick many below dismiss the winning images as "crap" and "ordinary" without any real understanding of the projects themselves. Judged in isolation, I agree that some of the shots look like snapshots. But, so do some of the most important/impactful images in the history of photography. I just got back from Paris where there was a large exhibition of Henri Cartier-Bresson. If you take one of his images in isolation, it's easy to say "gee, I could have taken that." But, viewed as a body of work, most come to a very different conclusion. It does make me upset (unfortunately) that so many amateurs on this site are so dismissive of working professional's work. They should stop, slow down, and try to appreciate a little more.

Unfortunately, as usual, too many of the below comments and replies got personal. Let's talk about photography, instead. So, for all you folks that are calling the images "crap" and "ordinary" or "nothing special." Let's understand why? Remember, these images are from a series. The judges were not evaluating them individually, but rather as a project - so it seems fair you should evaluate them in the same way. That said, let's take a look at the "Photographer of the Year" Sara Naomi Lewkowicz. What about her project is "crap" for you? Why do you feel she didn't deserve the top honor for her project on domestic violence?

Wrong. Check the locations on his website & you'll see that none of the places were ever ruled by a Palestinian government. One shot is across the border fence into Jordan, & one on the Golan which was a (unoccupied) part of Syria. The rest of the locations were part of the Ottoman empire conquered by the allied forces.

I think the project is interesting, the images contradict our preconception of a place most of us imagine as desert.

Do you mean to say the single image #7 isn't interesting, or do you not find all 12 of his images in the portfolio interesting, along with the context of "examining the relations between the natural world and the man-made in a land that has been so dramatically changed over the course of history"?

Pretty hard to come up with something interesting or even worth getting excited about when just about every genre has been covered and exploited. This must be one of the most boring results within the the last decade. Tough to be a judge, especially a young one without any experience and a memory.

if you were involved in painting, and you would watch regularly a brush selling & review site, and that brush selling & review site would post a brush producer painting contest results, would you take its judgment as serious as you take dpreview's post of sony photography awards?

sony made a brilliant piece of publicity for them selves by making so many camera prospects speaking about something organized by their brand. and dpreview takes a share of it by posting and hosting those comments about that contest. that's it.

(I definitely am on the side of those who clearly see that "the emperor has no clothes" on, as bakhtyar kurdi so brilliantly put it.)

At first I also thought the pictures were lacking but if you spend the time viewing the series, real gems can be found and some may not be technically excellent, but the story they tell punches above that. Nice series.

Like I said, SONY is trying to popularise enthusiast photography by showing that anyone can do it. This may be a marketing strategy. There seems to be a trend of promoting the ordinary in the arts recently.

Emotion may be you preference (and, I disagree that no images here are emotive), but, in fact, many good photographs historically are not emotional. There are many diverse means of creating compelling images. Emotion may be common but is not requisite, therefore a false criterion.

Go to the website and view the series for each. Look at the first image, for example. Not very exciting, right? Now, check out the entire series and tell me it's not emotional. Take some time. DPR is doing a disservice by just posting one "representative" image from each series. Remember, these are working photojournalists and documentary photographers being honored not just for a single image, but for a PROJECT.

"but, in fact, many good photographs historically are not emotional. There are many diverse means of creating compelling images. Emotion may be common but is not requisite, therefore a false criterion."

RUBBISH! any great image will evoke an emotional response. The actual event of liking ( or disliking ) something is an emotion.

My point is that emotion, in the manner in which it was presented, is not requisite. Bernd and Hilla Becher's photography works of architecture from the 1960's through the 1970's were not emotional, but still compelling and historically important. Additionally non-objective or abstract photography can be divorced from emotion yet still stimulating. Liking something is an emotion; but both you and I know that that is not what is at issue.

You understand quite well that I am speaking to inherent demands (intent) before being compelled or stimulated or liking. You are hair-splitting and not respecting the context of the initial dialog. You may like (or not like), be stimulated or compelled by, the work of Bernd and Hilla Becher and others, but calling their work "emotional" would be a mis-characterization. I think in your sword rattling with another poster you have stumbled into dialog with me with only one half of your brain committed.

I think the the people saying these images are mediocre should look at the entirety of the photos in each collection. Each of these images were individual photos picked from collections that tell a pretty powerful story when viewed in their entirety.

I think if you took the time to look at them in their proper context, you will have a much different opinion of them.

I did. Went though the entire set of series in Pro category and was quite disappointed overall with just a couple of exception. And I was looking explicitly for the context, not the quality. Way too many series reminded me of a photo club-like projects that I used to participate: photographing local bridges, park alleys, social events from hundreds of different angles. Most of my projects looked exactly like some of those winners; the only difference is that I usually trashed mine instead of sending them to a contest. Just look at my album here called "Panning"; how is it different from the top three winners in Conceptual category? So when I go to see a world contest, I don't want to see the same stuff I can find in my personal amateur album; I want to see much more, I want to see Wow, I want to feel speechless, I want something absolutely breathtaking. I didn't get any of that from the Sony winners, even from those that I liked.

Perhaps if you can provide a contemporary example of a series produced by someone with "great skill", I might agree that it is better work - or at least comment on what I perceive as its merits. But your cocksure dismissal of all this work featured, without any specific explanation of reasoning, seems removed from what that work is; more about your psychology.

Historically, you've made multiple mention of fecal waste. So I am left to assume that you regard much contemporary work as such. What I don't understand (you and others) is all the vitriol in dismissing work; the vitriol not so problematic as the general tendency to use terms like "crap" without providing mindful explanation of tge basis for such judgment. That something does not please your/their visual sensibilities, satisfy technical expectations, etc., is a perfectly valid reason for not caring for a type of work. But there should be a much higher standard of articulated reasoning for declaring something "crap".

big kids adopted by media, think for you, decide for you what to eat, what to drink, what to smoke, who to love, who to hate.who can be adopted? a child or someone that can't make decision.So actually they make you disable, not because you have no abilities, but you gave up your senses optionally as a soldier surrounded by many enemy soldiers,to be captive is not fun, but most people have no ability to face armies of the media or armies of their adopted brainwashed zombies ,but everything looks perfect, I am totally free and no one can force me to do or think or believe anything outside the media, that is the meaning of the free world.But there is some hope with our and next generation when I can talk to many people sitting in my couch, I don't have to be a media emperor to share my thoughts with my friends, not my clients or adopted zombies.The problem is with the chaos that made by directed media in the last 100 years, we have the tools, and the majority are innocent victims.

Yikes - following your thinking here and in previous posts demands a discipline I may not possess. But somehow I am drawn to them: the fractures, pivots, strange repeated references to smoking (3 by my count) - I smoke and often miss the ocassional smoking reference in dialog; not so much proud of the fact, but still. In your original post you refer to culture turning away from the black and white and embracing gray; in this way we are unable to see simple polarities like beauty vs. ugliness, right vs. wrong, etc. But as is illuminated in later posts, you claim this is directed by some media agenda [media certainly does have great influence, particularly with increasing consolidation - some agenda, yes, fair assertion]. But, do you really think there is an agenda (an agenda requiring shared intent) to confuse the beautiful and the ugly? Or could it be that if such a condition exists, it is due not to a conspiracy of elites but some more organic evolution of culture? I don't feel in everyday teaching activities (employed and santioned by an institution) that I have any particular role in or sympathy for dissolving pure notions, replacing them with grays that serve the interests of the elite.

In any case, I enjoy the frenetic path of your idea(s). I'd love to have you over for a BBQ and talk about things.

These images (series) are from professional, working photojournalists and documentary photographers. This category is judged on the series as a whole, not technical achievements of individual photos. This contest is not about beautiful butterflies, cat photos, sunsets, and landscapes. It's about storytelling with images. I would imagine if you were to look at many Pulitzer winning photos, you'd also come to the conclusion that, isolated, they are "nothing special" or in your sophisticated words... "turds." Unbelievable the ignorance.

"This contest is not about beautiful butterflies, cat photos, sunsets, and landscapes." --- what patronising drivel.

"These images (series) are from professional, working photojournalists and documentary photographers." --- So what? Images, and even a series of images ( yes I did take that into consideration, which you conveniently ignored ), should stand up on t heir own merits and not on who took them. Me thinks you suffer from the logical fallacy of Argument from authority

"Unbelievable the ignorance." - Translation: "He/she has different tastes to me so is therefore inferior and ignorant."

Smeggypants, you're really too much: first YOU pass judgement, then you accuse the person who calls you on it of acting superior. The only case of which this exchange is a "classic" example is the pot calling the kettle black (hint: you're the pot).

Wrong. I respect everyone's subjective opinion on images. When Mr Superior comes along and acts all superior because he doesn't respect other people's subjective opinion then Mr Superior is going to get called out on it. Simples :)

A true artist KEEPS THE BEST AND THROWS AWAY THE REST. In this respect, a true artist knows that less is more. An artist refines the essence to its core and doesn't bore. In my opinion most of the winners of this competition have not kept the best and thrown away the rest. Therefore I don't believe they are great artists. Most of the comments below indicate this. The photos are evidence. I believe Sony is trying to popularise enthusiast photography by showing that anyone can do it. This may be a marketing strategy. It is consistent with Flickr's recent promotion of plain snapshots on its Explore section. There may be a recent trend to promote the ordinary in society.

It's really so unbelievable how many people don't get it. These images are not winners because they are beautiful, technically perfect photos. They are images from a series. The first image, for example, Sara Naomi Lewkowicz, is a well regarded photojournalist that as documenting domestic violence. Just look at many Pulitzer winning images - would you necessarily want them hanging on your wall because they are beautiful? If you want technically perfect images of sunsets, etc., then look elsewhere. The second image from Ludovic Maillard - he's a well regarded professional with a long CV including dozens of exhibitions. His images are not meant to be decor. Those criticizing these images as "ordinary" should AT LEAST do a little homework and research. Really, embarrassing for you.

That's your problem - you don't care. My assumption is that you just browsed the representative images that DPR posted vs. actually going to the website and trying to understand why these WORKING PROFESSIONALS were honored. But, my guess is, as you say, you don't care.

And stop patronising people who aren't fawning over these images by claiming they want pictures of fluffycats, beaches, sunsets et al. Why don't you just respect that many people aren't fawning over these pictures simply becuase they were taken by people with some kind of alleged credibility. That might be important to the sycophants and those incapable of thinking for themselves and need to see someone's C.V. before deiding upon the merits of an image, but many of us like what we like.

Persons should always feel comfortable in expressing what they like and don't like. As a teacher, I am very supportive of a range of opinions, particularly because I was raised in a climate far academic influence. My problem (and pardon the redundance) with some of the commentary is that declaring something invalid, e.g. "crap", should come with a basic responsibility to provide a reasonable explanation of that judgment.

Your statement that "people don't need to justify their tastes" seems to be rather at odds with your blatant repudiation of the tastes of Seltzer, DPR and all the photographers featured here in Sony's awards.

"Imbecile" was strong language, and I wish I hadn't used it -- but now that you've replied I'm no longer able to edit or delete it! ;-) That said, if Smeggypants is free to emphatically suggest that other people's work is "crap", etc., I feel it's fair for me to suggest that his behavior is imbecilic. As for "rude", well...what alternative assessment is there? So I wasn't attacking him the person, but questioning his behavior here in this forum. And if we can call a spade a spade, I think it's safe to say that, for whatever reason, he's been trolling this Sony piece. I'm all for bold and divergent views, but they needn't be shared inconsiderately.

So you see ugly snapshots been showed as world winner photos, also you see an ugly lady been elected as miss universe, actually if you walk 10 minutes in your local shopping center you will find at least 10 ladies that are 10 times more beautiful that many misses,but what is the impact on those news on you? will explain:the first thing you see with your eyes is ugly images, or an over possessed ugly lady, then you back up mentally one step and look around,did anyone saw me or noticed that I am not happy with judges decision? then quietly you start looking for reasons why they did that, read more news and comments to come to a logical reason that works against your taste, when you don't find anything logical, but all kinds of media celebrating those great news, you start doubt your ability to see or taste or judge, at the end you gave up and follow the pack,repeatedly you lose or your senses and become a big kid adopted by media,think for you, decide for you what to eat,what to smoke

For me a 'good' photograph or series inspires awe, enriches the moment, opens my mind and heart, arouses curiosity, and motivates me to go see and photographically capture similar scenes while improving technique. This can include subjects of stark reality.

The Sony series do not do this for me. Instead, after viewing most of the series on the Sony site I feel puzzled, sad, depressed, and distinctly unimpressed by the consistent 'flat light look' of subjects and that created by post-processing. These are a poor advertisement for Sony, and I own Sony and Canon equipment.

I am happy there is many healthy people here that are brave enough to say :The emperor has no clothes.Others who pretend to love those ugly snapshots are thinking this way:I know they are ugly,but they are been proved buy top class photographers, so there is a hidden reason behind selecting them, but I don't know what is it, but someone for sure knows,so if I criticize them I will look stupid in front of those who understand what is going on (and there is none) The difference between the story of the emperor and this story(and all our stories ) is :in the case of the emperor,some smart people sold imagination to the emperor and made him walk naked, in our stories the emperor is selling imagination, and made everyone (or most of them) to walk naked, just to prove to himself that he deserves to be an emperor and everyone else is stupid.smoke kills every year 400 million people around the world, and almost everyone still smoking,so you don't believe that the emperor is correct?

And Andres Serrano's "P--s Christ", made in 1987, is somehow representative of the contemporary art world? Even in its time, such works were in tiny proportion to other noncontroversial works. And this is also the case now. Really beside the point of the conversation specifically about this contest.

As representative of a contemporary photography trend to subvert the immediate recognition of landscape, I find Kacper Kowalski's series very engaging. The overhead perspective is becoming increasingly familiar to our eyes (satellite maps), but these images are beautifully crafted compositions - so many of them initially seeming non-objective form, then becoming very specific as winter landscape. As I mentioned, this type of photography is hardly new, but the formal execution here is exceptional.

It really doesn't do justice to the winners to take 1 photo from a series and show it alone. The architecture winner (no. 2 in this sequence) looks un-inspiring and drab beyond drab. Take their whole series and it actually catches the eye in a dramatic fashion.I know DPR can't show all (say six) images in a series for each winner as the gallery would be in triple figures - but at least before anyone starts throwing brickbats at the judges and photographers, take time to peruse the works that make it a whole.

This is the reason I rarely enter photo contests. What were the judges smoking?

Those complaining about negative comments must be art reviewers. Many of these photos are very ordinary, if not surprisingly bad. So what if they're part of a "series?" They're still not good. There are some quality images, but the architecture and landscape shots make me wonder what was going on at the judging.

This is why you don't enter contests? I'm sorry, are you a professional photojournalist or documentary photographer? If not, you would't even be eligible to enter this category. If you were, you would understand why these won.

First, this competition involves photography in series; as such, individual images serve the interests of the series as a complete articulation of concept. Many comments here reflect only viewing and evaluating the one image from a series shown in in the article (click on the series link below each image).

Still, whether in acknowledgement of the full series or looking at a single image, opinions should always be welcomed. As an educator, it is never my goal to dictate opinion - or invalidate certain opinion, positive or negate, in a majority or minority, agreeing with potential art world concensus or not. But - and this is so very important - before one offers judgement of form or more complete content (particularly done so vigorously, emphatically), one should feel the obligation to take the time to form thoroughly-considered commentary. The absence of this basic form of respectful behavior is sadly repeatedly present here. Particularly when making a comment amounting to a dismissal of merit, this is rather lazy and irresponsible.

What I ask you sir, is the point of art if it is meant to be enjoyed and appreciated only by those rigorously trained in the study of "art"?

Art is for people to enjoy and appreciate first and foremost and if there is a deeper meaning to it, so much the better. If said appreciation and enjoyment can only be had if one does an in depth study of the matter being displayed it is not art for the masses but only for the critics.

What then is the point of art if it is only for the "select" and "knowledgeable" and those of "superior" judgement?Such art is not compelling and not lasting.

I never stated that art should only appeal to intellectuals. I only suggest that one be considerate in judgment. Even after years of evaluating art and photography on a professional level, I must always remind myself not to limit myself by preconceptions. I grew up riding motorcycles, and hardly speaking for the elite, in terms of art or otherwise. That I went on to complete an advanced degree and teach art does not mean I think exclusively as an academian. But, yes, I do have a better grasp of context than many.

One thing you state is actually demonstratively untrue. Much of the more "lasting" art, historically, was less-than-enthusiastically received when it was produced. Often in these cases, neither the public nor academia immediately recognized its merit.

Certain art might challenge the natural visual or philosophical sensibilities of the viewer. In this way, rewards may not be immediate, but can be, given time, very profoundly impacting. So, you are quite wrong about the quality of art always being so immediately obvious.

Just as predictable as the sun rising - a bunch of amateur photographers criticizing the work of others with the same, tired chorus of, "these are just snapshots" and " anyone can create these." Well, then why don't YOU create them and enter a contest? Why don't YOU create a cohesive story-telling body of work and submit it to galleries? Why don't YOU do something other than take shots of your cats, sunsets, kids, butterflies, and backyard flowers? Yes, it's easy to sit back and negatively comment on other's work. I guess it's much more difficult to try and understand why very credible judges chose these as winners. Good grief.

"Should there not be a difference in the ordinary snapshots of mere "amateurs" and the creative work of "artists"?"

I know this us going to rub some of the formalists and technically-minded the wrong way, but in fairly rare cases, the answer is: no. A relately small number of conceptual artists, use in service of overall content, snapshot aesthetics and other visual motifs that reference what some might see as visually amateurish. The value of such artists' work is evaluated based on quality of concept. This conceptualism is nothing new; it dates back, in smaller measure, to the beginnings of the twentieth century.

@Fauad6: many of the winning photos are part of a series of images . The are not to be judged individually, but rather as a series expressing a point of view. For example, the first image. Taken by itself, it's a mere snapshot. But, it's by Sara Naomi Lewkowicz who is a photojournalist that did a series on domestic violence (the series is somewhat controversial as many were critical of her because she didn't intervene). So, that ONE image taken by itself - no big deal, agree. BUT, Google the photographer and the entire series. It's quite powerful.

There is some acceptable pictures there, not great, but most of them are just a snap shots that everyone of us delete hundreds of them because we get embarrassed if someone accidentally saw them. or to clean our hard drives.I am quite certain that the art of photography is getting worse and worse, not because there is no great artists, but because the media and so called freedom were succeeded to make people believe that there is no difference between beauty and ugly, right or wrong , justice or injustice, there is no black and white anymore, everything is grey.I know what is your reaction for the above, so please don't tell me : do you want to teach me what is ugly and what is beautiful? do you want to control me and decide for me what is justice and injustice? I am free and I decide for myself , so we are giving away all experiences that we learned from the time of Adam, and mixing everything together, no standards, no worthy values, everyone is a superman,but they still smoke.

"There is some acceptable pictures there"Are you looking for 'pictures'? You are at the wrong place. And the fault is yours.Acceptable??? Did you look at them? Did you spend a little time before you make your judgement?

As often a mediation of complex issues, I am quite appreciative of art's tendency to embrace grays. I look to much to be dimensional in this way. Still, there is much art that is the contrary. What you may be mourning is not so much the absence of black and white in the world, or directives, so much as the fact that many have abandoned such fundamentalist thinking.

It is called marketing. Have you seen a Sony DSLR user won a Canon sponsored photo contest ? Have you seen a Canon DSLR user won a Nikon sponsored photo contest ? Have you seen a Nikon DSLR user won a Sony sponsored photo contest ?